A second-rounder and a fifth for a guy who is 32 years old and hasn't done muhc. He might be getting a bit hot in his last five, but he's going to have to be better than that to make this anywhere near a reasonable trade.

And, by the way, Allen got sent down in order to make room. Elliott's back. Sure he is.

dhabums wrote:You and your buddies here are a joke and most of this site knows it.

Sponsor of Having A Real Good Time, Happy Pony, and all those who suffer from being right all the time.

Nyghtewynd wrote:A second-rounder and a fifth for a guy who is 32 years old and hasn't done muhc. He might be getting a bit hot in his last five, but he's going to have to be better than that to make this anywhere near a reasonable trade.

And, by the way, Allen got sent down in order to make room. Elliott's back. Sure he is.

The Blues could trade for Patrick Roy, Mario Lemieux, and Bobby Orr in their primes and it wouldn't be enough for you.

Never said it fixes everything. And I'm not happy that we sent Allen down, either. But I also know that the trade deadline is Wednesday, so the Blues may not be done. If this is all they do, it might be underwhelming. But it could just be the first step leading to some other moves, we will see.

I don't think it's a terrible deal. We didn't lose anyone off of our roster, we had two 2nd round picks anyway (the extra was from the Ben Bishop deal), and we gained a veteran D-man w/ a left shot who 'only' costs $3 mil against the cap. The Blues aren't the type of team to go after the marquee names in trade or free agency, so getting a solid vet is never a bad thing.

I'm more bummed about Allen going back down than anything. Neutral on this trade, they didn't really give up much. Like DMiles said, the 2nd rounder was an extra pick anyway and the 5th round pick... how likely would that pick be to pan out for us anyway? If Leopold helps bring some W's and secure up a playoff spot, we'll see what happens from there. I don't really imagine this can hurt us, unless Elliott ends up getting some ice time.

Not blockbuster but you can never have enough solid D men. He's older so that should help the young kids too. I feel better with the defense after this trade than before. Like pitching, can never have too much D.

Still issues but this is a plus on the trade. Now to solve the goalie, forward, leadership etc issues...much, much more complicated. I can't imagine it's easy to be a Blues GM with the financial restraints and the complete hard sell it has to be to draw high quality talent here.

"Shanahan beating up on a Winnipeg player..." - Ken Wilson April 14, 1994

How did us acquiring Paul Kariya or Keith Tkachuk help fix the team's issues? Or how did the Chris Stewart/Shatts trade help fix the team's issues. News flash, the problem isn't the players, the problem is their mismanagement. Much as I have concerns about David Backes, I feel he's being held back from being the kind of leader he needs to be and Hitch is just so far off track that it's become dangerous. At this point in the game, we could be GIVEN a Shane Doan or a Jarome Iginla and I seriously doubt it'll help because the people running the show would find a way to screw it up, just like every other owner we've had, has.

What I don't get is, WHY do you buy a hockey club without any financial ability to make it competitive enough to be a contender? The NHL Board of Govenors will put Winnipeg through the wringer to get a team they should never have lost in the first place back in Winnipeg, will take tens of millions of a hit to keep the Yotes running AND in Phoenix, but they'll take any goomba offer that can have the minimum amount to buy and run a team. What?!

How did us acquiring Paul Kariya or Keith Tkachuk help fix the team's issues? Or how did the Chris Stewart/Shatts trade help fix the team's issues. News flash, the problem isn't the players, the problem is their mismanagement. Much as I have concerns about David Backes, I feel he's being held back from being the kind of leader he needs to be and Hitch is just so far off track that it's become dangerous. At this point in the game, we could be GIVEN a Shane Doan or a Jarome Iginla and I seriously doubt it'll help because the people running the show would find a way to screw it up, just like every other owner we've had, has.

What I don't get is, WHY do you buy a hockey club without any financial ability to make it competitive enough to be a contender? The NHL Board of Govenors will put Winnipeg through the wringer to get a team they should never have lost in the first place back in Winnipeg, will take tens of millions of a hit to keep the Yotes running AND in Phoenix, but they'll take any goomba offer that can have the minimum amount to buy and run a team. What?!

Not trying to start anything here, but why is it that every time the Blues start to tank, its the coach?? In the past five years, we have lost three coaches because of this thinking, granted two of them should never have been given the reins in the first place, but Murray was a heck of a coach, but was ridiculed for the way he was treating Perron, oshie etc...GONE...then they switch to Payne, who babied the boys, and still got the ax...

IMHO Hitch is the best coach we have had sinc Q was here. It's time to hold the boys accountable and stop making the coach the scape goat. I honestly think that a drastic move, like trading Perron ( whom I actually REALLY like as a player) will light a fire so intense under this teams butt, that they will go far into the playoffs this year. ( I say Perron because regardless of how many points he has, he has been doing things more and more his way, and less Hitch's way, and has become more of a liability then an asset, ).

How did us acquiring Paul Kariya or Keith Tkachuk help fix the team's issues? Or how did the Chris Stewart/Shatts trade help fix the team's issues. News flash, the problem isn't the players, the problem is their mismanagement. Much as I have concerns about David Backes, I feel he's being held back from being the kind of leader he needs to be and Hitch is just so far off track that it's become dangerous. At this point in the game, we could be GIVEN a Shane Doan or a Jarome Iginla and I seriously doubt it'll help because the people running the show would find a way to screw it up, just like every other owner we've had, has.

What I don't get is, WHY do you buy a hockey club without any financial ability to make it competitive enough to be a contender? The NHL Board of Govenors will put Winnipeg through the wringer to get a team they should never have lost in the first place back in Winnipeg, will take tens of millions of a hit to keep the Yotes running AND in Phoenix, but they'll take any goomba offer that can have the minimum amount to buy and run a team. What?!

Not trying to start anything here, but why is it that every time the Blues start to tank, its the coach?? In the past five years, we have lost three coaches because of this thinking, granted two of them should never have been given the reins in the first place, but Murray was a heck of a coach, but was ridiculed for the way he was treating Perron, oshie etc...GONE...then they switch to Payne, who babied the boys, and still got the ax...

IMHO Hitch is the best coach we have had sinc Q was here. It's time to hold the boys accountable and stop making the coach the scape goat. I honestly think that a drastic move, like trading Perron ( whom I actually REALLY like as a player) will light a fire so intense under this teams butt, that they will go far into the playoffs this year. ( I say Perron because regardless of how many points he has, he has been doing things more and more his way, and less Hitch's way, and has become more of a liability then an asset, ).

Flame on all

Good points, so the question goes like this: Since we seem to all agree that holding them responsible and rewarding/punishing for good/bad play, WHO is the one that holds them responsible and WHO is the one who rewards and punishes them? As far as I see it, all I am seeing the front office do is sign off paychecks and barter deals for contracts with these guys. I don't see any of these guy hurting, any of them benched and any of them reprimanded in any way, shape and form. Leadership isn't doing it, the coach isn't doing it, the GM isn't doing it and the owners aren't doing it.

While Chris Stewart is great when he is scoring, he is an absolute liability on the ice when he is not. Is he ever held accountable for not scoring? I have never seen it, since he has joined the Blues.

Perron - we have all seen his play this season. Is he ever demoted to the 4th line?

Recently, Stewart joins Backes line and suddenly Backes sucks defensively. A few games later, Stewart is put on a line with Berglund. What happens? 3 GA against later from that line alone, Berglund gets demoted to the 4th line.

Yes, it is a good question. Who is holding players responsible for their play? It is supposed to be the coach. I'd like to hear Hitch is bag-skating every player who winds up -2 or more in a game. Or at least see the "star" scorer who isn't scoring forced to play with the crappy ice time while the 4th liner who works gets the "star" time. That should send a message. Unfortunately, I doubt we will see this happen, because Hitch has a "more modern" mentality now.